I believe that balance transfers trigger an Account Review many times. So if we have a lot of new accounts,inqs,etc the lender will see it then rather than a regular scheduled AR and may take action against us. 
I think it's the sum of all parts. The bt along with the too many new accounts. At least it was in my case.
@baller4life wrote:I believe that balance transfers trigger an Account Review many times. So if we have a lot of new accounts,inqs,etc the lender will see it then rather than a regular scheduled AR and may take action against us.
A BT is a new risk to the bank, so it is likely they monitor how those perform.
Adding in the factor of many new accounts, that changes the discussion of whether BT cause reviews, expands it with another risk factor for the bank.
As with all discussions of credit tendencies, we need to be sure to include all the relevant factors in the review of what triggered any particular AA. 
In my case, having high balances at the time of a global credit crisis, that was the trigger for AA, CLD and changes in terms. It was not the many BT that I had done to and from all those cards in the prior years.
@NRB525 wrote:
@baller4life wrote:I believe that balance transfers trigger an Account Review many times. So if we have a lot of new accounts,inqs,etc the lender will see it then rather than a regular scheduled AR and may take action against us.
A BT is a new risk to the bank, so it is likely they monitor how those perform.
Adding in the factor of many new accounts, that changes the discussion of whether BT cause reviews, expands it with another risk factor for the bank.
As with all discussions of credit tendencies, we need to be sure to include all the relevant factors in the review of what triggered any particular AA.
In my case, having high balances at the time of a global credit crisis, that was the trigger for AA, CLD and changes in terms. It was not the many BT that I had done to and from all those cards in the prior years.
A lot of good points that have been discussed in this thread, thank you for input as well NRB! I do believ and agree with Baller, that doing a BT does trigger and red flag ones card with the lender, and they are looked at more closely. It does seem that if someone is hit with AA of any kind, it always follows a BT. Thats the trend Im following.
Back to Cap1 and Discover..I mention them because if someone needs to do a BT for financial reasons that make sense to them, Cap1 is very solid on no AA in general. I dont think Ive ever seen a thread started by someone that Cap1 took AA. Ive only seen where they have "restricted" their new accts due to verifcation. Cap1 is a great company if you need to do BT, and I rarely see posts of AA from Discover, only CLD's for non use. I appreciate all your insight though. It helps people think things through
@pizza1 wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:
@baller4life wrote:I believe that balance transfers trigger an Account Review many times. So if we have a lot of new accounts,inqs,etc the lender will see it then rather than a regular scheduled AR and may take action against us.
A BT is a new risk to the bank, so it is likely they monitor how those perform.
Adding in the factor of many new accounts, that changes the discussion of whether BT cause reviews, expands it with another risk factor for the bank.
As with all discussions of credit tendencies, we need to be sure to include all the relevant factors in the review of what triggered any particular AA.
In my case, having high balances at the time of a global credit crisis, that was the trigger for AA, CLD and changes in terms. It was not the many BT that I had done to and from all those cards in the prior years.
A lot of good points that have been discussed in this thread, thank you for input as well NRB! I do believ and agree with Baller, that doing a BT does trigger and red flag ones card with the lender, and they are looked at more closely. It does seem that if someone is hit with AA of any kind, it always follows a BT. Thats the trend Im following.
Back to Cap1 and Discover..I mention them because if someone needs to do a BT for financial reasons that make sense to them, Cap1 is very solid on no AA in general. I dont think Ive ever seen a thread started by someone that Cap1 took AA. Ive only seen where they have "restricted" their new accts due to verifcation. Cap1 is a great company if you need to do BT, and I rarely see posts of AA from Discover, only CLD's for non use. I appreciate all your insight though. It helps people think things through
+1
Well, just cause a lot of people here may be paranoid when it comes to AA, that doesn't mean AA ain't coming I mean, my credit-to-income ratio and amount of unsecured credit isn't but a fraction of what a lot of people on the boards here have, but even I found myself hitting a few of the red flags in that Experian white paper on busting out that was posted a few days ago. So yes, an average CC user probably has no business worrying about AA, but these boards are stacked with non-average credit users since people here seem to overwhelmingly fall squarely into two groups: rebuilders and, let's call them, credit enthusiasts who collect CL(I)s like some people collect stamps; point being: most people on these borads are more risky (or at least could be perceived to be such by bank algorithms) to banks whether due to the derogs they have or the amount of open credit/fairly aggressive credit seeking (as compared to the average consumer) so, a little bit of paranoia is not entirely unwarranted.